A Comparison of Acellular Dermal Matrix to Autologous Dermal Flaps in Single-Stage, Implant-Based Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

被引:58
作者
Krishnan, Naveen M.
Chatterjee, Abhishek
Van Vliet, Michael M.
Powell, Stephen G.
Rosen, Joseph M.
Nigriny, John F.
机构
[1] Dartmouth Hitchcock Med Ctr, Geisel Sch Med Dartmouth, Div Plast Surg, Dept Surg, Lebanon, NH USA
[2] Tuck Sch Business Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH USA
关键词
TISSUE MATRIX; MASTECTOMY;
D O I
10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182865a24
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The use of acellular dermal matrix has allowed for single-stage immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy at a significantly decreased cost compared with two-stage expander/implant reconstruction. The use of a pedicled autologous dermal flap in the same fashion as acellular dermal matrix in women with larger, ptotic breasts has also allowed for single-stage immediate breast reconstruction with similarly low complication rates and without the added procedural cost of using acellular dermal matrix. There have been no prior studies evaluating whether the added procedural cost for acellular dermal matrix is cost-effective relative to using an autologous dermal flap in single-stage immediate breast reconstruction following mastectomy. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify published complication rates for single-stage, implant-based immediate breast reconstruction using either acellular dermal matrix or an autologous dermal flap. The probabilities of the most common complications were combined with Medicare Current Procedural Terminology reimbursement codes and expert utility estimates to fit into a decision model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of acellular dermal matrix. Results: The decision model revealed a baseline cost difference of $261.72 and a 0.001 increase in the quality-adjusted life years when using acellular dermal matrix, yielding an incremental cost-utility ratio of $261,720 per quality-adjusted life year. Sensitivity analysis showed that acellular dermal matrix was not cost-effective when the complication rate for autologous dermal flaps was below 20 percent. Conclusions: The authors' study demonstrates that acellular dermal matrix is not a cost-effective technology in patients who can have an autologous dermal flap in single-stage immediate breast reconstruction.
引用
收藏
页码:953 / 961
页数:9
相关论文
共 47 条
[31]   Prepectoral breast reconstruction with complete anterior implant coverage using a single, large, square-shaped acellular dermal matrix [J].
Hong, Hyun Ki ;
Kim, Yun Hyun ;
Lee, Joon Seok ;
Lee, Jeeyeon ;
Park, Ho Yong ;
Yang, Jung Dug .
BMC SURGERY, 2022, 22 (01)
[32]   Extended dermal sling for implant-based immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction in large ptotic breasts without using a mesh in early breast cancer [J].
Gaber, Ahmed ;
Elsisi, Alaa ;
Fawzy, Ahmed .
EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2023, 42 (01) :151-156
[33]   A Nationwide Analysis Evaluating the Safety of Using Acellular Dermal Matrix with Tissue Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction [J].
Luo, Jessica ;
Moss, Whitney D. D. ;
Pires, Giovanna R. R. ;
Rhemtulla, Irfan A. A. ;
Rosales, Megan ;
Stoddard, Gregory J. J. ;
Agarwal, Jayant P. P. ;
Kwok, Alvin C. C. .
ARCHIVES OF PLASTIC SURGERY-APS, 2022, 49 (06) :716-723
[34]   Systematic review of cost-effectiveness in breast reconstruction: deep inferior epigastric perforator flap vs. implant-based breast reconstruction [J].
Hansson, Emma ;
Brorson, Fredrik ;
Lofstrand, Jonas ;
Elander, Anna ;
Svensson, Mikael .
JOURNAL OF PLASTIC SURGERY AND HAND SURGERY, 2024, 59 :1-13
[35]   Review: Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy for Breast Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Prospective Studies Comparing Use of Acellular Dermal Matrix (ADM) Versus Without ADM [J].
Ng, Trina Priscilla ;
Loo, Brandon Yong Kiat ;
Yong, Nicole ;
Chia, Clement Luck Khng ;
Lohsiriwat, Visnu .
ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2024, 31 (05) :3366-3376
[36]   Review: Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy for Breast Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Prospective Studies Comparing Use of Acellular Dermal Matrix (ADM) Versus Without ADM [J].
Trina Priscilla Ng ;
Brandon Yong Kiat Loo ;
Nicole Yong ;
Clement Luck Khng Chia ;
Visnu Lohsiriwat .
Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2024, 31 :3366-3376
[37]   Complications after Perforated versus Nonperforated Acellular Dermal Matrix Use in Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Score Analysis [J].
Wood, Kasey Leigh ;
Margulies, Ilana G. ;
Shay, Paul L. ;
Ashikari, Andrew Y. ;
Salzberg, C. Andrew .
PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2020, 8 (03) :e2690
[38]   Post-Mastectomy Tissue Expander Placement Followed by Radiation Therapy: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Staged Autologous Versus Implant-Based Unilateral Reconstruction [J].
Bloom, Joshua A. ;
Shah, Shivani A. ;
Long, Emily A. ;
Chatterjee, Abhishek ;
Lee, Bernard T. .
ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2023, 30 (02) :1075-1083
[39]   Pre-pectoral Breast Reconstruction: Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Two-Stages vs Single-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction [J].
Zingaretti, Nicola ;
Piana, Michele ;
Battellino, Laura ;
Galvano, Francesca ;
De Francesco, Francesco ;
Riccio, Michele ;
Beorchia, Yvonne ;
Castriotta, Luigi ;
Parodi, Pier Camillo .
AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 2024, 48 (09) :1759-1772
[40]   Implant Based Breast Reconstruction With Acellular Dermal Matrix Safety Data From an Open-label, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial in the Setting of Breast Cancer Treatment [J].
Lohmander, Fredrik ;
Lagergren, Jakob ;
Roy, Pankaj G. ;
Johansson, Hemming ;
Brandberg, Yvonne ;
Eriksen, Catharina ;
Frisell, Jan .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2019, 269 (05) :836-841